His Excellency the Governor General in Council, on the recommendation of the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, pursuant to subsection 18(1) of the Canadian Wheat Board Act, hereby directs The Canadian Wheat Board to conduct its operations under that Act, while the Bill entitled Marketing Freedom for Grain Farmers Act is being considered by Parliament, in the following manner:
(a) it shall avoid extraordinary actions or commitments that would be contrary to the best interests of The Canadian Wheat Board if that Bill is passed by Parliament and receives royal assent; and
(b) it shall credit profits or gains referred to in sections 8, 33.01 and 39.1 of the Canadian Wheat Board Act to the contingency fund established under paragraph 6(1)(c.3) of that Act, unless a different disposition of those profits or gains is required under that Act.
Related: Facts, Lies and the House Debate – I am utterly amazed that Mr. Goodale, the author and architect of the current CWB Act, would actually take the position that an Act that he wrote was meant to bind future governments to this policy, which would mean they can’t repeal the Act. Are we really supposed to believe that was his intent?
UPDATE – Open letter from Henry Vos who has just quit as a CWB director.
The CWB’s decision this week to launch a legal challenge against the Federal Government over the proposed changes to the CWB ACT, when it is clear to everyone that it will not change the outcome and would not change the timing of the government action, is simply wrong.
October 26, 2011
Allen Oberg, chair of the Canadian Wheat Board’s farmer-controlled board of directors, will hold a news conference today (Oct. 26, 2011) at 11 a.m. CDT to announce action to defend Prairie farmers’ democratic rights, in relation to federal government plans to remove their single-desk marketing structure for wheat and barley.
News conference: CWB chair announces action for Prairie farmers
Wednesday, October 26, 2011
11 a.m. CDT
Ammeter family farm
9045 Roblin Boulevard
Headingley, Manitoba (maps below)
Anyone who doesn’t believe Goodale’s intent was to bind future govs is delusional; that’s the intent of all policy passed by previous Liberal govs.
Imagine, if Ralph Goodale, the Liberals and the NDP truly believe it is possible to bind future governments with simple legislation, what could the Conservatives set in stone? Just one majority and they can make Canada a Conservative bastion simply by adding the line “Future parliaments may not change this law” to every bill they pass.
My, my. Tampering with Liberal legislation. That’s a crime that ranks right up there with High Treason.
Wouldn’t want a trend to start, you know. Why, those damned Conservatives might even consider tampering with the Holy of Holies and put property rights in Trideau’s sacred charter.
No, eh?
Interesting that Pat Martin agrees with the Prime Minister that no legislation can bind future governments. They’re both right of course; it’s a centuries-old parliamentary principle that Parliament is supreme irrespective of the statutes of any previous Parliament.
Ralph Goodale is blowing wind from his backside…
There is no such thing as the ‘poison pill’ interpretation of the Constitution.
The present government is not bound by past government’s policy decisions. This is the whole purpose of having elections in a democracy!!
Should the voter decide that the present government is headed in the wrong direction and or corrupt one can vote the bums out.
Ralph is just playing this card because the CWB was his ‘baby’. The LIEberals are no longer the goverment, so CWB profit skimming is no longer the order of the day.
If Ralph hasn’t noticed Gerry “Puttin on the Ritz” is now running the CWB ‘happy hour’. Clearly, Ralph is disgruntled that the old crew can’t play the same game as in their hey days.
Monopolies hate the idea of freedom…after all it cuts into their fiefdom profits.
Cheers
Hans Rupprecht, Commander in Chief
1st Saint Nicolaas Army
Army Group “True North”
Kate, this is clearly off topic to this particular topic, but this seriously merits a thread of it’s own – the “1%” fight back with their Occupy Occupy Wall Street Movement –
http://www.oows.org/
There are some video clips of their counter protest. It had to happen sooner or later.
So just out of curiosity, now that Mr. Oberg has announced legal action against the federal government for introducing this legislation to the House, does the money come from farmer’s pockets via the Wheat Board, or from farmer’s pockets via direct donations to the cause?
I assume the former, but I would hope the latter.
…but Ontario farmers are free to market their 97 million bushels of wheat any way they dam well please.
They’re such weasels. The Act isn’t saying that the Act itself is eternal — written in stone, can never be replaced with new legislation. It’s simply saying that while the Act is in place — i.e. currently legal — there are certain rules that must be followed about how the CWB handles decisions about grain.
If one applied the logic of Turmel and the other weasels to women’s suffrage, for example, women in Canada would never have obtained the right to vote in the early part of the last century! Using Turmel’s logic, since the law didn’t allow women the right to vote in the past, therefore Parliament could never change the 19 Century sexist Elections Act to allow women the right to vote.
Well, Parliament is simply doing the same thing with the CWB Act — allowing farmers to market their own grain freely and voluntarily for the first time in decades (not excluding the right to market it collectively if they so choose, by the way). Parliament changed the Elections Act to liberate women and treat them as equal citizens 100 years ago, now they are changing the CWB Act to liberate farmers and treat them as equal marketeers in a free market economy. But for some reason the backwards Dipheads and Libs are stuck on ideals based on involuntary Stalinist collectivism from the Soviets in the 1950’s.
Forced collectivism is supposed to be progressive? They’ve got to be kidding. And since when does lieing in Parliament about the meaning of Legislation constitute a legtimate duty of Her Majesty’s Loyal Opposition? It’s a breach of trust, and the NDP should be de-certified as a legitimate political party — they’re a bunch of Commie fascists intent on subverting free democracies with their cranky and archaic Stalinist ideals — agricultural ideals that are so anachronistic that even the former Soviet Union has abandoned them, China is seriously rethinking them and experimenting with new ideas, while Cuba and North Korea remain mired in the past and economic backwaters.
With all due respect, Turmel, Goodale and the gang are a bunch of political retards.
Okay, wait a minute, from what I’m getting now rom the youtube comments, this is a comedy duo setting up a mock counter protest. Damn, i got PRANKED, lol. :$
What ricardo said.
For that matter, if all we ever saw of this parlimentary exchange was a 15 second sound bite on CBC, many people would be willfully mislead into thinking Harper actually broke the law.
Soooooo glad for the internet, and SDA.
Pat Martin has the wit to recognize that the ability to prevent a bill from being altered in the future would be a powerful weapon for the conservatives, and would soon make Canada ungovernable.
The other NDPers can not, apparently, see more than one move down the chess board. Not surprizing given that some of them are still trying to find their constituency on a map.
Its so simple the GOVERNMENT needs to just rescind the whole damn act.
Good for Mr. Henry Vos. Integrity is a virtue that always pays dividends.
Perhaps there may be a place for Henry Vos on some future CWB, or perhaps on a new marketing co-operative voluntarily created by a consortium of farmers.
Just one thing to add to my screed — something I remember from my Grade 10 Social Studies class: there’s a phenomenon called “the tyranny of the majority”, and what it means is that certain fundamental principals necessary to maintain a free society cannot be subjected to a democratic vote.
For example, if by some some quirk of history the majority of Canadians one day voted to abolish free speech, freedom of association, freedom of movement, the principles of equality, justice and the rule of law, property rights and individual security, freedom of religion, freedom of thought and conscience, etc., then we would be piss out of luck — we’re a free country whether the wannabe Fascists in our midst like it or not. In fact it would be against the very foundation of a free democracy to even hold a vote on issues like that. Otherwise, if “majority rules” were unconditional, then we could hold a binding referendum on whether homosexuals should be lynched or Jews should be annihilated (hence imitating Iran)! And the results of the referendum would become law because the democratic majority said so. That’s what “tyranny of the majority” means.
Unless Turmel and the NDP gang never graduated Grade 10 I’m sure they are aware of this basic principle — so why are they pretending that Canada is a primitive democracy based on mob rule, rather than fundamental constitutional freedoms?
Unfortunately Barack Obama seems to suffer from the same political retardation, because he once stated that whatever kind of democracy Islamic countries choose for themselves would be valid. Sorry Barack, but there’s only one kind of democracy that’s valid: the kind that’s based on freedom. The “Democratic People’s Republic of North Korea” is not a valid democracy either.
Even if only one (1) farmer in all of Canada wants the right to market his grain (his personal property) freely — assuming he markets it honestly and conforming to established health and safety practices — the rest of the 34 million citizens of this country should not have the right to “democratically” vote away that one farmer’s fundamental freedom. Please go back to Grade 10 and take a Social Studies course, Mr. Goodale.
Unless Turmel and the NDP gang never graduated Grade 10
No One has answered this question to me yet, Why is Ontario & Quebec exempt?
And i dont mean Well Because they are, I use to ask our Liberal MP of the day the same question and same reply, i will get back to you on that important question.
I’d be inclined to suggest to ricardo that he should calm down, except that I happen to agree with pretty much everything that he has said. His reference to one farmer vs 34 million Canadians is especially galling given that some wheat farmers are exempt from the monopoly depending on where they are.
On second thought, I do have one disagreement with ricardo. His characterization of several MP’s is far too kind.
Simple answer? ‘Cause Ontario and Quebec politicians are anti-Western bigots.
I didn’t realize that western wheat farmers were only canadians and not the rest of canada to be under the title of CWB.
Canadian wheat board therefore should be for all canadian wheat farmers from coast to coast to coast. Whereby, all wheat farmers should under the CWB act follow the same rule or else be sent to jail as it happened to western farmer who wanted to sell his wheat on his own.
18. (1) The Governor in Council may, by order, direct the Corporation with respect to the manner in which any of its operations, powers and duties under this Act shall be conducted, exercised or performed.
The government can pretty much direct management to follow any orders it sees fit and the directors are obligated to comply as stated later in the section.
I hear paper shredders.
Finally, after many years, the farmers in the east will no longer be discriminated against by being banned from selling wheat thru the Canadian Wheat Board. Guess those farmers will soon be considered Canadian. sarc off
If a law can’t be changed, guess the govt could make all kinds of laws re marriage, abortion, bilingualism, unions and so many other topics to bind us for the next centuries.
In the end, the ultimate form of democracy for the Wheat Board is to see how many farmers would subject themselves to a voluntary board.
The Harper Government is just allowing that form of democracy to manifest.
BryanR: Ontario wasn’t included in the CWB because it had its own wheat marketing board. In 2000, the province allowed for the first time three options: continue selling to the board, forward selling, or direct selling to elevators and other purchasers. The program was only run on a trial basis for three years, but by 2003, more than 80 per cent of Ontario’s wheat was being sold directly to the market under the third option.
The trial program became permanent.
One case where I don’t think a government should have been allowed to rewrite legislation was when Ernie Eve PC’s put in a requirement for a referendum for tax increases in 1999 and that very same government in 2002 decided to put in a tax increase by changing the legislation rather than holding a referendum. The Lieutenant Governor should have told them, you asked me to sign legislation requiring a referendum to increase taxes, I did so on your advice and now you are advising me that your prior advice was garbage? No, you need to call a referendum or call an election and then I’ll take your advice on this matter if you win the election. Red Ernie was completely disrespectful of the Lieutenant Governor’s office by his actions. He should have been a Liberal, he’s the reason we have McGuinty.
For anyone who had any qualms about the CWB corruption this ought to show just how far the rot has set in. That they are so desperate to enforce their regime against even the government, shows it is not a democratic organization, but a cartel. An unfair one that just penalizes one area of the Nation.
For the benefit of another region.
The second World war is over. Canada can’t get rid of these Marxist scams soon enough in my opinion.
I take Offense to the Globe & Mail Ref: to the Govt of Canada as a Dictatorship, And so should many others.
Wheat board takes Tory ‘dictatorship’ to court; two directors resign
steven chase AND paul waldie
Ottawa and Winnipeg— Globe and Mail Update
Published Wednesday, Oct. 26, 2011 11:51AM EDT
Last updated Wednesday, Oct. 26, 2011 4:16PM EDT
*IMO: Ya know I have been following this for a number of yrs now & i basicaly got more interested when a wheat farmer outwest was arrested for selling the product he produced on his own & not through the Gulag Consordium.
I have a freind here in ontario that is a poducer of wheat & other farm products, And i have asked the question to him Why are you not subject to the same rules as western producers, Is this Not Canada we are suppose to be a free society are we not?
He cant answer the question.
**Now i see this Article in the Globe & Mail**
Wheat board takes Tory ‘dictatorship’ to court; two directors resign
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/canadian-wheat-board-set-to-take-ottawa-to-court/article2214257/
** like i said i feel offended by that Headline & the Use of the word “Dictatorship”
When we see a Board that Controls the Western Farmer, tells them what to do And if you dont do it You Will Be Arrested!
So i ask Who is the Dictatorship Here?
The Government of Canada that is trying to give farmers the right to make their own choice or a board that tells them they know best, Is that not even more then dictatorship But Communism
*Also when we are approaching a time of Remembrance when in the 2nd world war Canadians answered the call & gave their lives to rid the world of a Dictatorship.
So Again i feel offended by the Globe & Mail calling the Govt of Canada a Dictatorship, Give me a break, If the Globe lived in a country run by a dictator the paper would be shut down & the owners, editor & staff more then likly shot or jailed.
We live in a Supposebly Democratic Society, Apparently Not out west.
For years everytime that I had any discussion concerning the CWB with friends(whether they were pro or con CWB)I would always ask only one question.If the CWB is the “cat’s meow” then why are Ontario and Quebec farmer’s not in open revolt wanting to be part of it? Everyone…and I mean everyone knows the answer. The Prime Minister should (in open parliament)tell Goodale et al to pound sand and then sit back and watch them stroke out.That would be entertainment.
If laws cannot be changed then I guess sodomy is still a crime.
Just to remind wheat farmers out west in particular in Sask, Goodale the sask resident is the very one who put the western wheat farmer in jail.
And your right if the CWB is the ‘cat’s meow’ why isn’t the entire nation not subjected to the same dictatorship of the CWB.
Can you imagine a wheat farmer trying to do the best he can for his family by selling to highest bidder (market) was sent to jail. Shame, down right shame GOODALE.
Just to remind wheat farmers out west in particular in Sask, Goodale the sask resident is the very one who put the western wheat farmer in jail.
And your right if the CWB is the ‘cat’s meow’ why isn’t the entire nation not subjected to the same dictatorship of the CWB.
Can you imagine a wheat farmer trying to do the best he can for his family by selling to highest bidder (market) was sent to jail. Shame, down right shame GOODALE.
I remember the 2 farmers in Lethbridge who got to do time for selling there private property to someone besides the CWB. (fascist or what?)
If the farmers got jail for having private property maybe Goodall can do some time for wrongful imprisonment?
I highly doubt it would ever happen but it sure is nice to dream.
I believe that the reason that Mr Goodal is so against this legislation, it will be found that because the CWB was is a govt agency and is the sole exporter of wheat and barley,the liberal govt used the wheat and barley of Western Canada as collateral for borowing money to balance their books.They also used the quota and contract system to limit sales to keep an inventory of said grains on hand to satisfy European govts.and bankers.
I’m concerned the lawsuit will go somewhere. Does anyone here have the legal expertise to determine if they can stop the liberation of farmers or not?
Of the ten elected directors only 2 were working in the interests of famrers and the CWB. One has been suspended by a vote of the other directors and now the other has resigned. The supreme court upheld the governments order that the CWB was not allowed to spend farmers money promoting the CWB monopoly. Unless these directors are spending their own money they are in contempt of court.
Of the ten elected directors only 2 were working in the interests of famrers and the CWB. One has been suspended by a vote of the other directors and now the other has resigned. The supreme court upheld the governments order that the CWB was not allowed to spend farmers money promoting the CWB monopoly. Unless these directors are spending their own money they are in contempt of court.
Amazing act of hubris ….
While I was once ambivalent about the CWB’s effect and I still tend to support the willing participation of grain producers … the actions of the wheat board over the last 10 years or so have pretty much convinced me that this is bureacratic rats nest that needs to be completely removed/burned/fumigated.
ricardo, well said.
As a young grain farmer i would like to know why the roc is not subject to the cwb law.I did watch the debate on cpac yesterday seems like a lot of people from eastern Canada have a lot to say what goes on in my business. If the cwb is going to court with the feds what gives them the right to use my hard earned money to do so. Take up a collection and leave my cash alone.
cgh writes: “… no legislation can bind future governments. … it’s a centuries-old parliamentary principle that Parliament is supreme irrespective of the statutes of any previous Parliament.”
That’s what I thought, but the Supreme Court somehow decided unanimously that the government could not revoke its ill-conceived exemption of InSite from the Criminal Code of Canada.
All other CWB issues aside, don’t we have “freedom of association” guaranteed in the constitutuin? Couldn’t that freedom be construed that a western wheat farmed can do business with whom ever he damn well feels like, and its non of the governments damn business.
When the Governor General commands that there be business as usual, I assume he meant no lawsuits. By ignoring a totally lawful order under the CWB Act the directors are giving up protection from liability as stated in the act. Sue the directors for legal fees.
Pretty hard to playgames with a reduced cash flow that will result from the CWB monoply cancelled! The CWB was another tool used by the Libels to bribe and buy votes. Even after they lost the west vote they still used thaT CASH FLOW for their political purposes across the country and around the world. Checking their board of directors is the obvious. Start looking at the various service contracts the CWB has doled out and to who and for what purpose!
Deere Boy: read my post above. The CWB was set up for those provinces which did not already have controls on grains. Ontario farmers largely opted out of their system when the provincial government permitted it to do so.
As for your complaint about paying for the CWB lawsuit, now you see the downside of having “independent” bodies carrying out government policy and regulation. A few years ago, the government had to fire the head of the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission for defying a Ministerial order.
LSM: no, this is an utterly useless lawsuit, unless they can show that in passing this legislation, the government is violating Charter rights.
Roseberry: I stand to be corrected, but I believe that the SC made that decision based upon a ruling from the Charter.
cgh, the “Charter” only created one right: the right of the Liberal Party to impose its policies regardless of who actually wins the elections. Roseberry has it right: a court bent enough to make the Insite decision cannot be trusted.
It’s always hard to second-guess goons like these, but if these CWB types have any sense they’ve already lined up a judge willing to make any order they want. They’ve done it before. In the past, the Supreme Court had no difficulty overturning those decisions, largely because they all went directly against binding authorities written by Judge Rothstein, who has no interest in encouraging that kind of thing.
But in no previous case has party policy actually been directly at issue. Here, the Tories campaigned on a platform of killing the Board, and won convincingly. The Liberals campaigned against it. And with Insite, the Court declared that they were not prepared to let a mere electoral victory stand in the way of the party platform.
So, expect the CWB to win at trial. And don’t be too confident that the Supreme Court won’t go along with it. They may have decided to force Harper into using the notwithstanding clause, so as to give the Liberals a campaign strategy next time.
Assuming that the 18.1 Scar refers to at 3:45pm is from the law under which the CWB operates (as the context suggests), then the GGiC is using his management authority under that law to say “Assume this bill will become law and operate accordingly.” I see clauses like that in takeover contracts all the time (as an accountant). No big deal here.